Just when you thought HELL couldn't get any worse...

[1000Plateaus]

This post relates to a previous one I started (see here:). It describes my horrible experience with a MA thesis and advisor. Here are some things to keep in mind:

1) my advisor is leaving the country in 2 days for 8 months. So he was strict enough to get to defend before he left.

 

2) I applied to PhD programs a year ago (with letter from my 1st and 2nd reader) and got accepted to the same program where I finished my MA. This PhD offer got revoked, however, because my thesis was ready for defense.

 

Here's what happened yesterday:

I finally finished and defended my MA thesis. It was successful, and after taking an extra year to finish this difficult thing, I felt great. My celebration was cut short (it altogether lasted 5 min), when my Supervisor asked to speak to me in his office right after the defence. I thought he was going to congratulate me and finally, after nearly 2 years of writing, re-writing and struggling, say something positive about my work.

 

I was wrong. Here's what he said:

He looked me in the face, and told me that there is no way he can write me a letter of reference to a PhD program. He doesn't feel confident in my abilities, and is my thesis was a representation of my 'best work' he doesn't think I belong in a PhD program. He's made up his mind.

 

My jaw dropped. Keep in mind that the thesis I defended successfully was re-written nearly from scratch, I worked very hard to finish, and none of that factors into his decision. (Never mind that I was already accepted into a PhD program at the same Dept. as my MA last year, but the offer got revoked because my MA wasn't ready for defense).

 

I told him that I could do better. He said he doesn't think I can. I was traumatized, and very angry. I still am. And when I told him that I struggled because I picked a very ambitious topic, he said the word 'ambitious' isn't correct, but rather that "You just don't know what you're talking about." He went on to say that I had struggled more than any other MA student ever in his experience.

 

Here's a little historical perspective: as a MA student in philosophy, the Dept. asks its student to submit a thesis proposal that is approved by your committee. The topic I proposed was challenging, and at the original meeting, my Supervisor 'warned' me by saying 'It's gonna be challenging', very 'matter of fact-ly'.

 

Throughout submitting chapters, my supervisor kept reading and commenting, being very destructive rather than constructive. Not once did he intervene and advise me to scrap this project and write something more manageable that would be more successful.

 

I talked to the Chair of the Dept. right after my Supervisor had stunned me with this news. I protested that if the major issue was that my topic was too challenging, then why was it approved in the first place? Why didn't my adviser do his job and get me to change my topic? He had just watched me struggle and struggle with the material, pointing out that i was struggling, but did nothing proactive to actually help me through his ordeal. The Chair just said that the best I could do was to file a formal complaint with the University Admin about bad supervision. 

 

So, from my perspective, I feel as though my advisor set me up from the beginning just to watch me fail. I thought that getting a defensible thesis, after doing a lot of work and re-writing, was a demonstration of my hard work and perseverance, and that this would be a positive virtue in a student. But it wasn't. He essentially wiped his hands clean and moved on.

I spent 3 years of my life finishing my MA degree, and now the prospects of carrying onwards have been made that much more difficult in that my own Supervisor refuses to write me a letter. I've never been so angry in my life. to add insult to injury, I was accepted into a PhD program a year ago. But apparently now 'don't have what it takes'. He never advised me to try to get to a level where my work would be judged 'good enough' in his opinion for me to move on.

 

People in institutional positions of power can really fuck with people's lives. The last 3 years is a testament to that. 

[1000Plateaus]

I should quickly add that throughout my work experiences with my Supervisor, he kept giving me very critical comments about my chapters. I brushed this all off as him just being overtly harsh and cruel, and that he was attempting to advise and guide me. And yes, I did get my work to a point where was defensible, but now looking back on the past 2 years of writing, I am starting to think that the fact that he was fighting with me every step of the way was already a huge warning sign that he was never in my corner.

[danieleWrites]

What did the rest of your committee say about your thesis?

[1000Plateaus]

I haven't spoken directly to my 2nd reader yet about getting possible letters. He had some issues with the 3rd chapter, but perhaps if I demonstrate that I can do better and improve, maybe he will write on my behalf?

[MsDarjeeling]

Wow this is a crazy situation.  I'm wondering something though.  When you applied and got into the PhD program before, did your advisor write you a LOR then?  If so I don't see why repurposing that one is such an issue.

 

If they didn't then clearly you can get into a program without their help if you can even consider it that.  If your 2nd reader is willing to write one I think you can use the 'my advisor was unable to do one prior to leaving the country and will be gone for nearly a year' excuse if anyone asks.  After what you've described this guy to be like I wouldn't trust him to write a LOR anyway.   

[1000Plateaus]

Wow this is a crazy situation.  I'm wondering something though.  When you applied and got into the PhD program before, did your advisor write you a LOR then?  If so I don't see why repurposing that one is such an issue.

 

If they didn't then clearly you can get into a program without their help if you can even consider it that.  If your 2nd reader is willing to write one I think you can use the 'my advisor was unable to do one prior to leaving the country and will be gone for nearly a year' excuse if anyone asks.  After what you've described this guy to be like I wouldn't trust him to write a LOR anyway.   

 

 

Yes, the first time I applied got accepted into the PhD program, my Supervisor had written my a LOR. So between then and now, he was so unimpressed with me and my work, that he refuses to write me a letter. Like I said, my jaw dropped when he said it to my face.

[MsDarjeeling]

Well if that's the case then maybe you are better off not pushing for one.  If I were you I'd be very concerned that it wouldn't be positive.  Whatever is up with this guy you're better off getting as far away as possible.  Seriously.  Get letters from others who are pleased with your work, get into your PhD program, and don't look back.

[1000Plateaus]

Yeah, I'm trying to reach out to other professors who know me the in the Dept. It's difficult when your own advisor basically disowns you. Thanks for the advice.

[1000Plateaus]

The 2nd reader on my thesis committee unfortunately agrees with my Supervisor. They seem to think that I don't have what it takes to continue onto a PhD. My 2nd reader's main issue was that it took me 3 years to finish a 2 year program. My whole counter argument to that is that it only took me an extra year because the thesis topic I chose was too challenging. It was so challenging that my 1st draft of the thesis got rejected and I re-wrote 95% of it from scratch. If I had been advised to switch topics to something more manageable, or if I had chosen an easier topic, then I would have finished on time and wouldn't be in this mess. My Supervisor never advised me to switch to something more manageable, he just watched me struggle at something which, I think, he knew was doomed from the start.

 

But of course my Supervisor doesn't think I can 'cut it' in a PhD program. My 2nd reader agrees. So it's essentially their word against mine. I asked my 2nd reader that if I re-wrote the 3rd chapter of my thesis for him, would he read it? Or, if I were to audit a grad seminar with him and write a paper for it, would he read it? I just want to be given a chance to show that I have learned from my mistakes and that I can improve as a student. We'll see what he says.

 

I am still pretty fucking upset that when I told my Supervisor that I can do better and improve, he said (to my face): "No, I don't think you can." What kind of advisor or teacher says that to a student? Just from a pedagogical point of view, it's asinine and cruel. No other human being should be allowed to cast that kind of judgment, especially when it's a teacher-student relationship.

 

So I'm pretty disheartened and am trying to figure out what to do. 

[fuzzylogician]

The 2nd reader on my thesis committee unfortunately agrees with my Supervisor. They seem to think that I don't have what it takes to continue onto a PhD. 

...

I am still pretty fucking upset that when I told my Supervisor that I can do better and improve, he said (to my face): "No, I don't think you can." What kind of advisor or teacher says that to a student? Just from a pedagogical point of view, it's asinine and cruel. No other human being should be allowed to cast that kind of judgment, especially when it's a teacher-student relationship.

 

1000Plateaus, I am very sorry that you are in this painful situation. It is very difficult to hear unfavorable assessment of your abilities and to realize the implications of having a unfavorable review from your supervisor and second reader. What follows may be hard to read and I apologize in advance, but after you calm down a bit you may want to seriously consider your professors' opinions of your potential to succeed in graduate school. From all I can gather from this post and your previous one, there was never any serious blowout between you and your supervisor -- the main problem seems to be your ability to do up-to-par work at a reasonable pace. (Yes, I understand that some of the blame for that is on your supervisor for letting you take on what turned out to be an over-ambitious project but no, I don't think there is any reason to think your supervisor was maliciously setting you up to fail). You took three years to do a two-year degree and you had to basically write your whole thesis from scratch after the first submission was rejected. You may have finally brought it to a satisfactory level for a masters and you were therefore allowed to defend, but that does not entail that you can or should continue on to a PhD program.

 

It appears that both of the people who know your work best think that you should not, and they will not write you strong letters of recommendation. I think you should respect this choice, or (as you are contemplating doing) work very hard to change their mind and persuade them that you deserve their support. As it stands, if they do not believe that you can make it in a PhD program, you cannot ask them in good conscious to write such a letter. They will have to lie, or the letter will not be good; from their perspective, it's their name on the line: they are vouching for you and your success, but they don't believe in it. Beyond that, if they are in fact correct, they are doing you a favor in telling you their honest opinion from the start. Certainly, the delivery was lacking and hurtful in your case and I am sorry that you had to go through that. But not everyone who wants a PhD can be successful at a PhD program. It's better to know that now than to waste several years before either dropping out or finishing the degree but failing to get a job. I honestly don't know if this is true for you, but sometimes you simply have to tell students the hard truth instead of letting them just struggle along and waste important years of their lives on an impossible mission. 

 

As I said, I don't know if what your advisor said was a fair assessment of your work at all. Either way, it's important to view it as an assessment of your ability to do the training for a certain job, not as an assessment of your personality or person. There are extremely bright and successful people who would struggle in a PhD program because the requirements are set up in a such a way that it does not play to their strengths. That doesn't make them any less accomplished, you just need a very specific kind of personality, abilities and strengths to make it through, and only a (small) portion of it has to do with your intellectual abilities. Maybe that's something to consider. If, on the other hand, the assessments of your professors are simply wrong, I wish you all the best in your battle to attend graduate school. I think your approach is the healthiest one: do your best to prove that you are able and willing, and earn the letter and the trust.

[Roquentin]

First of all, congratulations, 1000Plateaus, for finishing and defending your MA thesis – that achievement is a testament to your determination.

 

However, I must agree with fuzzylogician (though I’ll be blunter). Doctoral studies are not for everyone. Given your difficulties and the manner in which you’ve described them, I recommend that you follow another vocation.

 

Doing so will not diminish the work that you’ve just completed. A master’s degree in a discipline as challenging as philosophy is a very fine accomplishment.

 

My only intent is to help. Please take care.

[IRToni]

I'm not in your area, but I will also have to agree with the previous posters. I don't know you personally, and don't know your work, and won't comment on whether you are suited to pursue a PhD.

 

However, the way you keep blaiming your advisor for not forbidding you to do the topic, to me is a red flag. You mentioned that he pointed out (more than once) that the topic you had chosen was very ambitious. What else was he supposed to have done? He gave you honest criticism, and mentioned that the topic was difficult/challenging/ambitious. You chose, despite his warnings, to pursue this topic, he kept giving you feedback. Maybe his communication style is more direct than you're used to, but I really don't see how HE screwed things up there. It's not really up to him to make you choose another topic, and, especially in grad school, it shouldn't be his responsibility.

 

Anecdotal evidence to follow: When I wrote my B.A. thesis, my advisor told me that it was VERY ambitious, and even proposed more manageable topics. I decided to go through with it. Now, my advisor knew me quite well, but obviously couldn't know whether I was capable of that. He said that he thinks it's ambitious, and might be hard and a lot of work, and I chose to do the topic nonetheless. That was then, IMO, my responsibility.

 

Now, you managed to get your thesis defended (though you have to see that you took 1.5 times as long as an MA is supposed to take, and spent overall probably 1.5 years on a thesis that was supposed to be written in more like half a year), and that's great. But even so, it doesn't seem like you had this huge breakthrough, you didn't wow your advisors. Now, they might be wrong, and you might have what it takes to succeed in a PhD program, but you should ask yourself honestly why you want to pursue a PhD.

 

In addition, if you decide to try and go through with it, I think it will be key to try to find the reasons why your thesis went as badly as it did, not blaming your advisor. It's your piece of work, something that you should stand for, not your advisor. Ask yourself what went wrong the first time, why it took you so long to realize how difficult this topic was (after being told by your advisor), and why you think the second thesis is not a true reflection of your abilities. Then, think of how to solve these problems, because a PhD entails writing a long piece of text, and if you have trouble writing the short MA thesis, those problems will most likely be exacerbated in your PhD, if you don't manage to solve them.

 

Hope you're able to make a good decision for you!

[1000Plateaus]

Thanks fuzzylogician, Roquentin, and IRToni.

 

I appreciate the honesty and the advice. I was really naive when I proposed my thesis topic. It was too challenging, and if I had discussed it in detail with my advisor, maybe I would have come to the decision to change the topic to something more doable.

 

I approached the challenging of tackling the MA thesis from a novice's position. I had never written something this big (I didn't do a BA thesis), so I had no idea what the right steps to take were. I did research, wrote a drafted outlined, and then started writing. My advisor's instructions were that I just give him drafts of chapters when I think they're ready.

 

I suppose what pains me is that I was already accepted to the PhD program in my Dept., with LOR from bother my Advisor and 2nd reader. Now, this was before my thesis was rejected. It's true that I unfortunately underwhelmed my advisor with my work, but I do sincerely believe that if I had chosen a smaller, manageable topic, the research and writing would have been smoother. And the main reason I struggled so much with my thesis was the challenging topic, plus a bad advisor-student match.

 

The thing is, I know what I did wrong. What my mistakes were with this thesis. I've learned from my experience and know what I need to do to improve myself.  I realize that PhD programs are that much more challenging than an MA, and if I were to continue onto a PhD program, I would have to really revise my approach to research and writing. I think I can grow and improve myself, my advisor doesn't.

 

I want to continue on with a PhD because philosophy is my life's passion. It's what I want to do with my life, and as clichéd as that sounds, it is true. So to be told that I can't do a PhD philosophy is analogous to telling a artist that they can't paint, or a writer that she can't write, and so on. I realize that I don't necessarily need a doctorate in philosophy to do philosophy, or continue reading, etc., but the degree is a symbol of recognition in many ways. 

 

But we'll see what happens. I understand that my advisor made the judgment call based on what he saw I could do. But I know that I can do better. Maybe the academic system isn't conducive to my learning and working abilities. 

 

Thanks again for the feedback, I do appreciate it.

[St Andrews Lynx]

People who say X is "their passion" and that they can't imagine doing *anything* else with their life...

...Well, they lack imagination. 

 

I'd encourage you to take a break from academia and think up some Plan Bs. There are plenty of non-academic careers out there that require critical thinking & analysis, teaching/mentoring others, that require you to read & write. Philosophy is something you can ALWAYS pursue on the side - adjuncting night classes, joining an amateur discussion group. 

 

Think about it. Your posts about the MA troubles made you sound MISERABLE (hair going grey, you needed counselling, your mental health suffered). Try adding 2-3 years of that kinda stress *onto* your 3 years on the MA, because that is what your PhD is going to be like. Is that what you want to do to yourself? I sure as Hell hope not... 

[1000Plateaus]

Thanks St Andrew Lynx,

 

You're right I do need to take time of and rethink my life decisions. That's what I plan to do now.

[Andean Pat]

Hi there! 

 

I've read the previous post and I remembered that I felt very sorry for you thus I am glad you could defend your MA thesis! However, when reading this post, and answer began to appear in my head, and I am glad Fuzzy said for me because it would have been really hard to write it.

 

 

I am still pretty fucking upset that when I told my Supervisor that I can do better and improve, he said (to my face): "No, I don't think you can." What kind of advisor or teacher says that to a student? Just from a pedagogical point of view, it's asinine and cruel. No other human being should be allowed to cast that kind of judgment, especially when it's a teacher-student relationship.

 

So I'm pretty disheartened and am trying to figure out what to do. 

 

I have taught in primary and secondary schools. Believe me, there comes a point that as a teacher you NEED to be as clear as possible so that the student gets your message. The same as the rest, I don't know if your advisor was right about your work or if his assessment is totally unfounded. However, I am only inviting you to see this from another perspective. MAybe he thought that with all his criticism he was telling you to quit the topic. Maybe when you didn't, he let you continue your work, defend the thesis, and THEN be clear about your abilities (again, I am not saying he was right, I am just proposing an alternative explanation).

 

I once had a terrible experience at work when I had to make a presentation for parents and for different reasons it was ready only a week before the due date. My headmistress looked at it over the weekend (the presentation was on a Monday) and late that Sunday night she sent me an e-mail two pages long on how disappointed she was on my work and that she could not believe I was presenting THAT. Of course, the presentation was a complete disaster. I complained to her of why she would tell me such awful things the night before: "I thought I might motivate you". See? In her head, she thought she was helping when in fact I was so stressed and bummed that made a fool of myself. 

 

So, as Fuzzy said, I would try to see this assessment as that, an assessment from people that have worked with you and have read your work. 

 

I want to continue on with a PhD because philosophy is my life's passion. It's what I want to do with my life, and as clichéd as that sounds, it is true. So to be told that I can't do a PhD philosophy is analogous to telling a artist that they can't paint, or a writer that she can't write, and so on. I realize that I don't necessarily need a doctorate in philosophy to do philosophy, or continue reading, etc., but the degree is a symbol of recognition in many ways. 

 

 

It's funny you mentioned this. All the philosophers I know do not work in academia. (Of course, the once I know do not live or studied in the US).

 

I do hope that you can see these 3 years as a process of learning (because it is obvious that you have learned a lot from your field, your work and yourself) and that you can let the waters settle so that you can decide on your next move. I am sure that you will find your path, be this a PhD program or something else...

[1000Plateaus]

Thanks Andean Pat,

 

It has been a huge learning opportunity, if nothing else.

 

Perhaps my advisor was trying to tell me to change my topic, albeit in a very passive and indirect way. I do need to take time off and let things cool down. I really do thank all of you for taking time to read and reply to what I've been through. It hasn't been a positive experience, and I was miserable in many ways (still am).

[NothingButTheRain]

The 2nd reader on my thesis committee unfortunately agrees with my Supervisor. They seem to think that I don't have what it takes to continue onto a PhD. My 2nd reader's main issue was that it took me 3 years to finish a 2 year program. My whole counter argument to that is that it only took me an extra year because the thesis topic I chose was too challenging. It was so challenging that my 1st draft of the thesis got rejected and I re-wrote 95% of it from scratch. If I had been advised to switch topics to something more manageable, or if I had chosen an easier topic, then I would have finished on time and wouldn't be in this mess. My Supervisor never advised me to switch to something more manageable, he just watched me struggle at something which, I think, he knew was doomed from the start.

 

But of course my Supervisor doesn't think I can 'cut it' in a PhD program. My 2nd reader agrees. So it's essentially their word against mine. I asked my 2nd reader that if I re-wrote the 3rd chapter of my thesis for him, would he read it? Or, if I were to audit a grad seminar with him and write a paper for it, would he read it? I just want to be given a chance to show that I have learned from my mistakes and that I can improve as a student. We'll see what he says.

 

I am still pretty fucking upset that when I told my Supervisor that I can do better and improve, he said (to my face): "No, I don't think you can." What kind of advisor or teacher says that to a student? Just from a pedagogical point of view, it's asinine and cruel. No other human being should be allowed to cast that kind of judgment, especially when it's a teacher-student relationship.

 

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here for a second - do YOU think you can?  Did your MA work represent your best work?  Or did you have more to give that didn't come through?

 

The point I'm trying to make is this: the two people who know your work the best have both come to the same conclusion.  They (at least one) may have some terrible people skills, but do you think their comments are valid or not?  The situation alone is cause for some heavy introspection and brutally honest self-assessment (NB: this is NOT equivalent to self-doubt, self-pity, feeling like crap, and generally beating yourself up).  IMO, it's time to take stock of who you are and what you do and do not bring to the table.

 

What do you have that will contradict them?  The last question is not rhetorical, but I don't need your answer to it - YOU do.  If you can deliver an answer to that question, I think you will find a lot more answers that you need to move forward, and possibly some reasons why they (or others in the department) should support your Ph.D application.  My purpose is not to fill your mind with self-doubt, but rather to cause you to solidify the source of your self-confidence and allow you to articulate it better.  

 

Knowing yourself - who you are, your abilities, your weaknesses - is critical.  Not only for the application but for any serious undertaking that is going to consume years of your life.  Knowing what you want out of it is not enough; having the entire picture of the journey and the process is critical.

 

You may note that I'm not coming at this from an academic perspective (just starting a Masters).  I just have experience working in/around people who are all too willing to deliver honest assessment of one another - most of it honest to a fault - and much of which may not be conveyed in the most pleasant manner.

Edited August 30, 2013 by NothingButTheRain

[1000Plateaus]

I do think I can. My MA thesis does not reflect my best work because I was transitioning from the BA to the MA. I had to break bad old habits that I developed in my undergrad (5 years), and relearn a lot of things - which wasn't easy. Again, I realize that programs are very competitive and given that I struggled so much does not bode well for me. I honestly do think that if I had been more attentive and aware of what was expected in a MA thesis, then I would have taken measures to ensure that I performed better. So yes, I do think I can do better.

 

I do have to take some time off to rethink a lot of these things, obviously.

 

The thing is, I know for sure that the MA thesis experience did not best reflect my abilities. I have strong ideas, but clearly communicating them through writing was one of my biggest challenges. I eventually did manage to write them down is a very clear manner, but it took awhile to break the old habits. It was a huge learning process for me, like I said. I personally made many mistakes (some out of ignorance, others out of naiveté).

 

My advisor and I were not a good match. His method of interacting with students is very hands off, he has 5-8 grad students to deal with, and rarely bothers to communicate to his students. He's also very intimidating, and not personable in the least. So while some students thrive under his supervision, I of course didn't. My mistake was to believe that if I endured all his nasty comments and verbal insults, that if I saw this thesis through to the end, then it would be impressive in some respect. Of course my assumption was wrong, I assumed too much and expected too much from him. I miscalculated the relationship, and there was enough miscommunication between us to give him the impression that "I had no idea what I was talking about ", when in fact it was me struggling with the writing process and attempting to properly articulate my ideas.

 

So yes, I am partially to blame here. And I suppose my Supervisor's judgment is based on what he saw: an anxious, struggling student who picked a topic that was way over his head.

 

All of this is to say that I need to re-evaluate myself, my goals and aspirations, my limits and boundaries. I still have my heart set on pursuing a PhD in philosophy, but I need to demonstrate that I can be successful at it.

 

Again, thank you all for the feedback.   

[danieleWrites]

Undergraduate studies are about, um, being taught with some independent-ish scholarship at the end. This varies by student and by discipline, but for the most part, there are few research projects included as a part of the program. Undergraduates must make their own research opportunities and move toward scholarship on their own. Sometimes faculty will encourage them, sometimes not. Graduate studies are about independent scholarship, not being taught. In the MA/MS program, there is that transition from being taught to independent scholarship, but the thesis is supposed to not only be representative of a student's best work, it should be proof that the student is capable of independent scholarship. The PhD program has little being taught involved. Yes, there are classes, but the student is expected to contribute as much to his or her own learning as the teacher. In a PhD program, you shouldn't expect much help from teachers, you should expect to be sort of colleagues-in-training. Colleagues don't tell you what to do, they help you figure out your options.

 

You keep returning to this characterization of yourself as a struggling student and the characterization of your adviser as an unhelpful person. I take your word for it that you struggled because you tried out scholarship that was beyond your capabilities and, reading between the lines, reasonably beyond the capabilities of the average MA student. I have a choice of ways to understand the phrase "struggling student"; its meaning depends on context. What were you struggling with? The material itself? The paradigm shift from undergraduate student to graduate student and all the new expectations and conventions that come with it? Yourself? Most of the time, "struggling student" is a student that has difficulties with the material. Sometimes, it's a student that hasn't adapted to the methods, expectations, and/or conventions of the learning situation. Sometimes, it's a student that has to struggle with his or her own self-doubts, lack of confidence, and so on; every student has these, but for some, they are an outsized impediment, rather than a more normal evaluation of ability. Sometimes, it's nothing more than maturity, a student struggles because he or she was not ready for the program. A lot of college freshmen drop out because they aren't ready for college. They need to do other things first. It's normal. Figure out what you struggled with the most. Currently, it sounds as if it was the material. As much as you love philosophy, if you struggle with the material, you might end up as one of those PhD candidates that never makes it past the coursework into comprehensives or the dissertation.

 

You believe in yourself and you have a goal. You are willing to evaluate criticism. This is most of the battle.

 

I suggest that you go to the university library and read theses written by graduated philosophy students. Read dissertations by philosophy students. The library should have these copies either in book form or electronically archived. Compare your scholarship to their scholarship. The dissertations will give you a strong idea as to what the philosophy department, and your adviser, considers to be appropriate scholarship from a PhD candidate, appropriate enough for them to certify that this person has earned a PhD. A dissertation is not just the student's best work, it's new knowledge added to the field. Can you do that?

 

The thing about this issue that bothers me is that your thesis committee signed your thesis when they thought it wasn't good enough. Why was your thesis good enough to get you an MA if your committee thinks it wasn't that great?

[1000Plateaus]

Perhaps I needed to take a break between my undergrad and my MA. I left my undergrad feeling mentally exhausted, and jumped right into a MA program. I realize that grad studies are about learning new scholarship skills and research skills, and looking back now, I can safely say that I expected more guidance from my advisor. I made too many assumptions about what was required.

 

By 'struggling student', I basically fit all the characterizations you mentioned. I overestimated the amount of research I needed to do, I overestimated the material, I had problems with transitioning from the BA, and adjusting to Grad school. But everyone goes through that transition, right? It's difficult for all undergrads to adapt to the Grad school life and experience. On top of that, I have some personal transitional issues which I am seeking therapeutic help for, so it was much harder for me than for most of on peers. See, I didn't read any Theses or dissertations in my MA, so I didn't have a working model of what was expected. That was one of my mistakes.

 

My committee signed off on my Thesis, but I suspect part of my Supervisor's motivation was that he is traveling abroad from Sept. 1 - May 2014, so he did not want to 'deal with me' any longer, regardless of whether or not the thesis represented my work. My 2nd reader was hesitant to sign off on it, he had issues with my last chapter and wanted me to spend some more time revising it.

 

So all of these conditions contributed to a less-than pleasant MA experience. But I know for sure that if I had been better prepared, and had an advisor that was a better match for me, I would have performed much better.

 

Also, just a curiosity, but I have several friends who are doing PhDs who took 3+ years to finish their MA degrees. Not only that, it's the rule, not the exception, that PhD candidates average around 6-8 years to finish their PhDs - only a numbered few finish 'on time'. So the fact that it took me an extra year to finish my MA degree isn't that strange.  

 

I know that I made a lot of novice mistakes. I know that I had difficulty adjusting to the graduate student life. I know that I picked a very challenging thesis topic, the scope of which was more suited for a PhD dissertation, rather than a MA thesis. I know that I wasn't a good match for my advisor, but instead of recognizing the warning signs and switching advisors, I powered through, naively thinking that if I endured, it would be worth it. 

 

But this is all to say that I know myself well enough to know that I can perform much better and do better work. Unfortunately, my MA thesis doesn't reflect my best work, because I was under so much stress, anxiety, and not to mention an unsupportive advisor.

 

I do need a break from academia, if only to figure some things out before I make any decisions.

[St Andrews Lynx]

The thing about academia (and life in general) is that knowing what you are capable of...means bugger all. You aren't admitted to PhD program based upon the strength of you knowing that you can cope with grad school: you are admitted based upon the actual, physical & tangible things that you have produced. Publications, graduate-level written work, grades on a transcript, LORs that judge your actual output. You don't get tenure because you know that you are capable of being a successful research professor - you have to actually be a successful research professor. 

 

My strong suspicion is that if you struggled with the MA, you will struggle also with the PhD. It is easy to correct mistakes - read theses before you start your program, take a break between transitions - but the underlying personal characteristics you possess are harder to change. Mental illness is a chronic thing, if it pops up during your MA it will return for your PhD. The characteristic of under-estimating what you're letting yourself in for will most likely show up in some form or other during the PhD.

 

It is dangerously naive to just assume that your idealised version of yourself will flourish in the PhD program: you need to ask yourself the brutal question of 'Would the version of myself that existed during the MA program, whom my advisor saw...would that version survive a PhD program?" Because although that version of you is the worst-case, nightmare scenario that can't possibly be the real you...that's the version that has a basis in reality. If an outsider read your narrative and examined your physical output, then extrapolated a prediction of future academic success based entirely on those physical/tangible things...what do you think they would predict?

 

I am by nature a deeply cynical person. I do know that people can change themselves - but it takes years, a lot of determination and willingness to accept complete responsibility for your actions. We can hide but we can't fully erase our weaknesses. 

 

Personally I think that your advisors refusal to write you LORs for PhD programs might be the biggest gift they've given you. Don't ruin the next decade of your life attempting to do something that will only damage you.

[1000Plateaus]

Lynx,

 

You do raise a valid point, which is that I need to prove that I am capable to being successful at the PhD level. I need to present at more conferences, write articles and get them published to boost my CV.

 

I never said I had a 'mental illness'. I have anxiety issues, and am seeking professional help. While it's true that the anxiety posed some problems for me when I was writing, I have learned a lot about what works for me and what doesn't. The main factors that went into my having difficulty at the MA level was choosing a bad advisor (for my needs), and misconstruing what was expected of me. One of the major difficulties in my MA was that I never felt as though my advisor was supportive of me. He's an odd fellow and doesn't emote much, which is fine, but because I was an insecure grad student, not having that kind of support really did a number on me. I had heard that my advisor usually waited till after the defense to give positive feedback, but unfortunately that didn't happen in my case.

 

I'm not merely blaming my advisor for all of my problems. Please don't think that. I admit that I was angry several days ago, but my main argument is that the reason I performed so poorly was partly due to the conditions (e.g., bad advisor-student relationship, working through personal problems, etc). I know myself well enough to know that I have done better work in an anxiety-free environment and it has paid off. So, if the conditions had been different in my MA, I would have done much better.

 

It's not that I am expecting an "idealized version" of myself to emerge in a PhD program. I understand that the workload is extremely difficult and it requires a certain level of steadfastness and self-discipline to see it through to the end. Maybe what I need is to take some time off and revitalize myself before I make any decisions. 

"Personally I think that your advisors refusal to write you LORs for PhD programs might be the biggest gift they've given you. Don't ruin the next decade of your life attempting to do something that will only damage you."

 

Will it 'damage' me though? This is what is my biggest problem with my advisor's judgment. He makes the assumption that I will naturally struggle more and more in a PhD program, but that's something he's assuming - it's not necessarily true. Now I may fall flat on my face. I may fail horribly and drop out of a PhD, who knows? But I want the opportunity, I want to demonstrate that I can endure it and work hard. I don't believe in letting someone else decide what my own limits are, I don't like in the least when someone says that I can't do something, when it hasn't been proven.

So my plan is to get articles published. If I can prove to myself that I can cut it professionally, then that's all that matters.

 

[Zorah]

You don't need your advisor's blessing or LOR to get into a PhD program. Apply. 

[1000Plateaus]

PhD programs in philosophy do require at least 2 LOR. So I need to get them from other profs who will vouch for me